Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2015 Jul;114(1):67-74.
doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.01.006. Epub 2015 Apr 7.

Reporting Numeric Values of Complete Crowns. Part 1: Clinical Preparation Parameters

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Reporting Numeric Values of Complete Crowns. Part 1: Clinical Preparation Parameters

Janine Tiu et al. J Prosthet Dent. .

Abstract

Statement of problem: An implemented objective measuring system for measuring clinical tooth preparations does not exist.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare clinically achieved tooth preparations for ceramic crowns by general dentists with the recommended values in the literature with an objective measuring method.

Material and methods: Two hundred thirty-six stone dies prepared for anterior and posterior complete ceramic crown restorations (IPS e.max Press; Ivoclar Vivadent) were collected from dental laboratories. The dies were scanned and analyzed using the coordinate geometry method. Cross-sectioned images were captured, and the average total occlusal convergence angle, margin width, and abutment height for each preparation was measured and presented with associated 95% confidence intervals.

Results: The average total occlusal convergence angles for each tooth type was above the recommended values reported in the literature. The average margin widths (0.40 to 0.83 mm) were below the minimum recommended values (1 to 1.5 mm). The tallest preparations were maxillary canines (5.25 mm), while the shortest preparations were mandibular molars (1.87 mm).

Conclusions: Complete crown preparations produced in general practice do not achieve the recommended values found in the literature. However, these recommended values are not based on clinical trials, and the effects of observed shortfalls on the clinical longevity of these restorations are not predictable.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 3 articles

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources

Feedback